I have to agree with the review, by the time you get to the end you're just left feeling 'is that it?' The whole thing seemed far too much like a filmed play, I'm guessing the intention of the dialogue was to be Pinteresque but theres only so many times you can get away with your characters saying cunt before it loses any shock value or humour. I suppose the whole thing is supposed to be an examination of macho behaviour and how men behave around each other but it doesn't really go anywhere.

Winstone was by far the best thing about the film, John Hurt's Old Man Peanut just seems like Albert Steptoe with Tourettes. Being as its from the writers of Sexy Beast, I thought it was a disappointment, theres not a single character anywhere near as memorable as Don Logan, and things aren't helped by the flat direction either, apart from the Victor Mature Samson & Delilah insert it seems too much like a filmed play/tv show.

Dissapointing given this is from the writers of Sexy Beast. It feels like they have bunched together a load of English actors renowned for their black humour gangster style (Ray Winstone, Ian McShane, and Tom Wilkinson for example) similar to how 'Four Rooms' bunched together the big rebel directors at the time (Quentin Tarantine and Robert Rodriguez). The similarity between these two films is, unfortunately, that they turned out rather bad. Not awful, though.

Have to admit I loved this film. I'm at a loss as to how Mr Newman can give this movie 2 stars and films such as Journey to the Centre of the Earth 3D 4 stars. Did anyone see that? It is one of the most shamefully bad movies I have ever seen. Kim, hang your head in bitter shame.

Awful awful film, it was just 5 words copy and pasted into dialogue, with no plot, nothing interesting, if I had to recall anything I can only think of a line, and that would be: "C**t f**king wifef**keing wifef**ker ain't ya, you wifef**king c**t." What a clever film. Sigh.

A film where 90% of it is set in a single room isnít the most cinematic sounding of films.

Ray Winstone stars as the main character Colin whose wife is planning on leaving him. This destroys him, causing him to get a group of his friends together. His friends being Archie (Tom Wilkinson), Meredith (Ian McShane), Old Man Peanut (John Hurt) and Mal (Stephen Dillane).

The group then decide the best way forward is to kidnap Colinís wifeís lover (Dave Legeno) but you never find out what his name is. He is taken to an abandoned old boarded up house.

This is where the majority of the story takes place as Colin wrestles with his conscience, the idea of his friends and the anger he feels. Does he take revenge on this man who ruined his marriage or does he let him go. Simple premise that plays out over about 90 minutes.

The acting is top notch all round. McShane is as a cool as you like and laid back. Old Man Peanut being the angriest of the lot, seaming the most old school person in the room believing and eye for an eye. Archie tries to put a human face on it, as a grown man who lives with his elderly mother would probably do. Mal is the mouthiest of the lot constantly berating the lover.

The script is very, very, very swarey with expletives flying around at almost every other word at some points. Due to the extreme language has a dark sense of humor that runs throughout the film. This works and it makes the situation seam quite real as people like these would use this language, its not say like a Guy Ritchie gangster film with people named all sorts of bizarre ways and speaking as they only seam to do in his films. Also at no point do we know if these people are gangster or just people who are very street wise. We know Colin has something to do with car sales.

It is an interesting premise on the whole and makes you think what you would do in that situation. The first time feature film director Malcolm Venville does a decent job but a film like this as little need for visual flair. We have some interesting set up with hallucinations but is over very quickly.

The main issue I had with the film was how uncinematic it felt. Despite the fine performances I canít help but feel it would be better suited to a 90 minute special on the BBC than being sat in a cinema watching it.

I agree that this alleged movie would doubtless have a greater impact had it been a play. Indeed much of its form and structure is in the format of a play being set as it is prdominantly in a single room.

I think criticisms of its plot are based on a misapprehension of the intention of the writers. I don't believe that the whole film was about the hard men in the room. I think they were just dramatic extras to provide relief sometimes comic to deal with a very difficult subject matter i.e divorce, separation and its effect on even the toughest of people.

While the acting was superb and of the highest caliber it could not make up for the vacuous feeling left at the end of the film which is entirely the faulty of the writers who did not conclude effectively. Or did they? Perhaps so abrupt an ending affords us the privileged of quiet contemplation

Four stars says Nuts magazine. 'Oh-ho', say my eyes. 'From the makers of Sexy Beast', boasts the blurb. 'O.K then', glint my kitchen-sink-crime-loving eyes. The fact is, this is a very different beast. What you people hate about it, I suspect, is the audacious novelty of John Hurt, Ian McShane and Tom Wilkinson playing jovial Cockney gangsters. Yes; I understand; the novelty is contrived. And yet, all cinema gangsters are, just as cowboys and (for Christ's sake!) vampires. Still, this as far from Danny Dyer territory as Moon or Solaris. The core of the story, especially in the closing minutes, concerns oblivion, with a strings soundtrack, and if it had subtitles, you'd lap it, you ponces. Favourite scene: the poetic, four-way ricocheting of C-bombs as Hurt and co. try to evoke --real, visceral-- guilt from their bound victim. And by the way, Board of Film Classification? The mere SUGGESTION of bloody violence and a C-unit minefield DOES NOT make for an 18 certificate. C----.

Four stars says Nuts magazine. 'Oh-ho', say my eyes. 'From the makers of Sexy Beast', boasts the blurb. 'O.K then', glint my kitchen-sink-crime-loving eyes. The fact is, this is a very different beast. What you people hate about it, I suspect, is the audacious novelty of John Hurt, Ian McShane and Tom Wilkinson playing jovial Cockney gangsters. Yes; I understand; the novelty is contrived. And yet, all cinema gangsters are, just as cowboys and (for Christ's sake!) vampires. Still, this as far from Danny Dyer territory as Moon or Solaris. The core of the story, especially in the closing minutes, concerns oblivion, with a strings soundtrack, and if it had subtitles, you'd lap it, you ponces. Favourite scene: the poetic, four-way ricocheting of C-bombs as Hurt and co. try to evoke --real, visceral-- guilt from their bound victim. And by the way, Board of Film Classification? The mere SUGGESTION of bloody violence and a C-unit minefield DOES NOT make for an 18 certificate. C----.